> Also, there's a world of difference between "managing" and "leading". Conflating the two is a root cause of many problems.
Exactly. I think the military distinction between command (leadership) and control (management) is very relevant here. One is setting overall enterprise goals and defining personal missions in this context. The other is checking resources, constraints, reporting, etc. These two are very different, hence the fundamental military distinction between the commander and his chief of staff.
You could also say one is defining/policing parameters, and the other is being the designated representative of the team’s choices within those parameters.
The manager defines the “no” (boundaries of what’s acceptable) the leader defines the “yes” (what will the team do next given the demands).
People often try to do both, which means defining a very narrow “you do this now” which ends up feeling authoritarian.
Also, there's a world of difference between "managing" and "leading". Conflating the two is a root cause of many problems.